Two ‘lame ducks’ and the risk of another war with Iran

Since Operation Rising Lion in June 2025, Middle Eastern countries have developed a keen sensitivity to warning signs of escalation involving Iran. Those signs intensified this week following President Donald Trump's defeat in the U.S. midterm elections and the political deadlock in Israel after its own elections. Adding to the uncertainty are ongoing negotiations between Tehran and Washington, a reminder that both surprise attacks against Iran over the past two years took place against the backdrop of dialogue between the two sides, which effectively served as a means of deception.

Across the Middle East, several pressing questions are being raised this week: What exactly would another attack on Iran seek to achieve, and how would it differ from previous operations that failed to topple the Islamic regime or eliminate its nuclear program? How would Iran respond this time, and would its retaliation include the familiar strategy of inflicting serious damage on Gulf states? And could another confrontation ignite a wider regional war involving additional fronts, foremost among them Lebanon?

In Iran, officials have struggled to conceal their satisfaction over Trump's defeat, particularly because the Republican setback is widely attributed in part to frustration with the war against Tehran. The election results have also been accompanied by growing criticism of Israel from both American political camps, illustrated particularly sharply by Vice President JD Vance's social media post on Wednesday. Some in Iran took additional satisfaction from the timing of the defeat, which coincided with the anniversary of the 1979 seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran.

They drew parallels between Jimmy Carter's electoral defeat amid the hostage crisis and Trump's loss, portraying both as historic examples of Iran's ability to influence elections in Washington. Yet there is no complacency in Tehran. Instead, the atmosphere is one of heightened alert. "If Iran is attacked, it will initially seek to expand the geographical scope of the conflict and strike the Gulf states, which it has always regarded as a weak link capable of putting pressure on Trump," explains Iran expert Danny Citrinowicz.

"Against this backdrop, the Iranians have recently been conducting missile tests to improve accuracy and penetration capabilities, while preparing to activate their regional partners, particularly Hezbollah, the Houthis and the Shiite militias in Iraq." Citrinowicz adds that Tehran has even threatened to strike first if it detects American or Israeli preparations for an attack. "At least at this stage, the leadership in Tehran is not projecting anxiety about renewed fighting.

It assumes that even if another conflict breaks out, Iran, having already overcome serious challenges, will demonstrate steadfast resistance, exact a heavy price from the United States and its allies, and ultimately force its enemies to accept the regime's continued existence and dominant position in the region." Iran warns Washington as Trump weighs his options Iran is also directing increasingly sharp warnings at Washington. Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei issued a statement Wednesday declaring: "The only way to achieve deterrence is to continue the strategy of an 'ever stronger Iran' [...] American power is waning, and the country is undergoing irreversible collapse and accelerating disintegration.

If the U.S. government betrays the will of its people to serve international actors who pay or blackmail it, it will discover that our 'no' comes with a nightmare." Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Iran's parliament speaker and one of Tehran's most powerful figures, who also serves as a senior representative in negotiations, declared: "Whether out of conscience or because of the cost of living, Americans said 'no' to war." The biggest question now is how Trump will respond to the electoral defeat.

He appears to face a dilemma and has yet to make a decision. "Given the crushing defeat attributed to him and the growing perception that the failure stemmed from the way the campaign against Iran has been conducted, Trump may choose to renew the escalation soon, even before the new Congress is sworn in," explains Dr. Shira Efron, a senior researcher at the RAND Corporation. "However, because Trump is so difficult to predict, there is also the possibility that he will move to end the confrontation, which is unpopular in the United States, including among Republicans.

In either case, we are beginning to see the end of the war, and Trump appears to be looking for a way out of the crisis. It is therefore possible that he will portray an upcoming military campaign as the final, decisive blow." Prof. Udi Sommer of Tel Aviv University adds: "The resounding failing grade Trump received from American voters is expected to significantly constrain his actions and influence his policy toward the Middle East in general and Israel in particular.

However, the decisive factor regarding Iran may actually lie in the interplay between the major powers, particularly China. His planned meeting with the Chinese president in Beijing in approximately two weeks is viewed by Trump as crucial to shaping his strategic moves across several arenas, including Iran." For now, there appears to be a competition between threats of renewed escalation, accompanied by reports of military buildups in the Middle East, and diplomatic efforts involving Qatari and Saudi mediation.

Vice President Vance is also attempting to advance discussions on a draft agreement that could bring the confrontation to an end. Vance has said there has been some progress in discussions about resuming negotiations on the nuclear issue and the Strait of Hormuz, and that no deadline has been set for an attack. Iranian responses have ranged from acknowledging a positive change in Washington's tone to subsequently declaring that the American approach remains unconvincing.

These developments have generated cautious optimism about the possibility of avoiding escalation. Nevertheless, the gaps between the sides remain extremely wide on all major issues, particularly the nuclear question, and Tehran has shown no willingness to soften its positions. Netanyahu's political crisis adds to regional fears Beyond the difficulty of predicting Trump's decisions, Netanyahu is also generating considerable anxiety across the Arab world.

His increasingly harsh attacks on domestic political opponents, his use of unprecedented measures, including efforts to push the head of Israel's Shin Bet security agency to take action against Arab lawmakers in an attempt to challenge the election results, the wave of delegitimization directed at Israel's Arab population and his declarations about preparing for diplomatic isolation and an economic siege under a "super-Sparta" model are being closely watched internationally, particularly in the Middle East.

These developments are fueling deep concern that Netanyahu could seek to advance a military attack at the present moment, disrupting political negotiations and efforts to form a new government. In the background, far more serious threats are accumulating, both regarding the options reportedly being examined by Israel and the responses Iran is said to be considering. International media reports have claimed that Israel approached the Americans about examining the possible use of a nuclear weapon to neutralize the facility at Pickaxe Mountain, while also warning that Iran was preparing to respond to an attack with chemical weapons.

These are reported claims, not independently established facts. Reports have also suggested that Tehran is preparing attacks against Western targets, particularly in Europe. These concerns come amid a wave of bomb threats involving aircraft traveling across the continent, which have prompted numerous emergency landings in recent days. The combination of two politically weakened "lame-duck" leaders, both bruised by electoral setbacks and driven by anger and a desire to restore their standing and reshape their historical legacies, could prove explosive when it comes to regional escalation.

It is important to remember that the previous confrontation, Operation Roaring Lion, ended without the collapse of the Islamic regime or the elimination of its nuclear capabilities. In fact, Tehran's leadership became more hard-line as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps strengthened its dominance. The confrontation also created a major global crisis that had not existed beforehand, involving maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran may now be considering a push toward acquiring nuclear weapons as a means of guaranteeing the regime's survival. In this context, particular attention should be paid to a statement made this week by Tehran's mayor, which may reflect a deeper shift in thinking within Iran: "We did not seek to obtain a nuclear bomb, but the extraordinary threats from the enemy will lead to a change in our doctrine." Dr. Michael Milshtein is a senior researcher at the Moshe Dayan Center at Tel Aviv University